Monroe v. Chapman
Idaho Supreme Court
1DissentBistline, Justice
The majority opinion sees the issue presented as being “simple,” declaring the issue to be “whether the Industrial Commission has the authority to entertain a class action The majority concludes that “[t]he Industrial Commission has the power to adopt a rule which would permit a class action proceeding .... ” It affirms the order appealed from because the Commission “has not chosen to adopt such a rule.” In making such a simplistic disposition of *272this extremely important appeal, the majority thus avoids giving any consideration whatever to the underlying issue.
The best which can be said for…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Minich v. Gem State Developers, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 1979
- Howard v. Washington Water Power Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1943
- Chambers v. State Ex Rel. ParsonsIdaho Supreme Court · 1938